You don't argue for Non sustainable practises, but you do argue for the factual evidence to be presented rather than a lock them out agenda. The greens zones will have no effect at all on the major causes of habitat destruction in Moreton bay. Industrial pollution and Urban run-off don't discriminate on what bit of water it ruins, good luck issuing a fine to the tons of rubbish flowing in from storm water drains all around the bay.Originally Posted by Atriplex
So rather than believing the hype of those that seek to banish the fisherman for their own agenda', search out the facts and if you can really find a shred of evidence that the recreational fishing on Moreton bay is actually unsustainable, Please lets us all know, we are dying to hear it.
I can't believe that so many people can't understand my (very simple) point. "If the fishing and mining is not sustainable than it should be stopped or altered to the point where it will be sustainable." What can't you understand? Please tell me I'm dying to hear!
Atriplex,
Your 2 months to late , you missed the baiting boat, Trippers enjoyed that while it lasted..., anyone can argue,, BUT WHY? and just ask the same question over again and again..Im sure many parents would relate to that.
How about you use the search function and read some of the older posts on the threads if you want to be informed so much, also you could do your own research, theres plenty out there if your interested,
How about you come back with all the facts and reasons as we clearly dont understand. Im dying to hear!
Mike
PS
We can all argue points of view, ie seatbelts are dangerous for to your health,, WHY?... well 70% of people who die on the roads are wearing them and only 30% of people who dont die etc... you could argue its safer not to wear them as ONLY 30% die as against 70%...
well with commonsense we all know thats not true but someone having some fun baiting people could always go back to that same proposition and not budge and demand others prove him wrong.. its nonsense debating and to me thats how you come across
Tangles KFC
Atriplex, Most members here do fish sustainably, they only take what they need for a feed and many fish with lures only and some for sport only. Sustainablity is at the very core of most fishos practice and note I said practice - not beliefs - because ausfish fishos actually practice what they believe (at least many of the members I know).
What we also hate are trojan horses (and typically its new members who do this) making assumptions, trying to force their own greenie opinions in the guise of being a fisho.
Yes we believe and practice sustainable fishing - what the greenies havent established is that practices arent sustainable - that bag and size limits arent working. Instead they go on about inflated dead turtle and dugong numbers inferring that its recreational fishos that are targeting and killing these beasts - all without any adequate proof.
We mostly agree that if the numbers of fish that are being taken are too large - then bag limits can be reduced, closed seasons and slot sizes introduced and enforced. This is a fish MANAGEMENT system. Lockouts arent "sustainable" ether.
Adam
Last edited by Adamy; 28-05-2008 at 08:15 PM.
That's right LGM and the point of this thread.
Her Courier Mail article was directed squarely at us rec anglers
and contained this jem.
"Alas, fishing man has not substantially evolved since Darwin's days. He remains a knuckle-dragging, bottom-dwelling predator that is primed to stalk the oceans until they're empty of life, after finding the evolutionary process (upward) tricky."
Obviously she took onboard some of our replies to the Courier Mail web site and did a little "evolving" herself. Or maybe it was pointed out to her by her editor, whatever the case it's a small win for us fisher folk and shows that we are proud, informed and prepared to speak out.
I also think she may have checked out a few Ausfish pages as well after reading some of her more recent work in the CM.
WISER USE OF WORDS URGED by Daphne Haneman
March 26, 2008 01:01am
Shadowy, unidentified online warriors hurl abuse, engage in free-form unhealthy hating, bullying and rancour; destroy a reputation here, vilify someone there; paralyse the truth or misrepresent it – it doesn't seem to matter and it's done with an undercover mouse-click via email, forums, websites and community networks.
Online comment has inflicted harm upon children, adults and businesses, and it is now vital to clarify the difference between opinion and abuse.
Cheers
Mike
Last edited by Mike Delisser; 28-05-2008 at 09:05 PM.
This is ridiculous. All I've assumed is that "the more national parks the better." I assume that the more protected breeding areas there are the more fish there will be. What's wrong with that?
"What we also hate are trojan horses (and typically its new members who do this) making assumptions, trying to force their own greenie opinions in the guise of being a fisho."
I should hope that you're just getting emotional. You're assuming a lot there.
Instead of making all these assumptions perhaps you could answer some of my questions.
For clarification: Fish Good! Fishing good! Over fishing Bad!
Hey Atrip.
How about you come back with all the facts and reasons as we clearly dont understand. Im dying to hear! or do we have to justify to you?
Mike
Tangles KFC
Regards
mod5
Posting Permissions
